Ragnarok

Reading those quotes I have to say that Petreley sounds like what Dougie Bendie would be if he could write code. Right down to the jabs about "reading comprehension". Hey, maybe Dougie is Petreley in disguise.

Jerry Smith

My $.02 are posted on the Petreley board now. {sigh}

RufusAtticus

Petreley is definatly an insult thrower, especially when he can't deal with some evidence.

Check out his hoops in <a href="http://forums.petreley.org/msg.php?th=9&start=0&rid=19&S=c0ea864959c70d38ddc3 0e3dbe6e7c1a" target="_blank">this</a> thread.

Please, it'll be great if some more people could get involved. It might help deter the discussions from becoming flame wars.

-RvFvS

KC

He uses the time-honored tactic of refusing to define species. When evidence is given for observed speciation in mosquitoes, he simply asserts that the result is still a mosquito. Such tactics make his site an absolute waste of time.

Cheers,

KC

KC

Speaking of internet trollery (and stalking), Richard Wein (called by Dembski an 'internet stalker') has written a critique of Dembski's book 'No Free Lunch' on Talk.Origins.
I think its hilarious that the IDists' objections to the critique on ARN are whiny complaints that it is too long. Apparently, some of them refuse to read it until Wein dumbs it down and makes it less work.

What a sorry lot.

Cheers,

KC

RufusAtticus

It appears that Nick (the owner) has descided to stop responding to me because he can't show why speciation in mosquitoes is not macroevolution.

If you can't deal with it, ignore it.

And he was the one claiming that the "evolutionists" were intellectually dishonest.

I'm also trying to put as many Linux references in my posts as I can.

Jon needs to come talk about reptoids.

-RvFvS

[ April 30, 2002: Message edited by: RufusAtticus ]</p>

Vorkosigan

I just loved npet's post to you <a href="http://forums.petreley.org/msg.php?th=9&prevloaded=1&post_form=&rid=20&S=05a5 04b6a9df9e1373a8ffe439349813&rev=&reveal=&start=40 &count=20" target="_blank">here</a>

• Show me the mosquito that, through mutations, added brand new information to its DNA so that it no longer sucks blood, but developed appendages that electrocute its prey in such a way that the victim explodes and splatters blood into a cup on the mosquito's back. Then show me all the intermediate forms of that mosquito -- the appendage that didn't yet have the ability to collect static electricity. The appendage that burned itself up when it did electrocute its prey. The half-formed cup. And so on. Show me the whole story from beginning to end by presenting the concrete evidence without a single step being explained by a just-so Barney story.

npet is avoiding facing the issue that the definition you used was his. Hysterical. Love the linux stuff too.

Vorkosigan

LiveFreeOrDie

Rufus,

I took your assist on the macro/micro discussion and asked NP to explain if the transition from Australopithecus to Homo sapiens was an example of macroevolution or microevolution.

BTW, I've been having a long discussion on 14C and isochron dating in the "Age" forum. I think I'm making progress since he's stopped insulting me.

Morat

Speaking of Setterfield, it was quite refreshing to see him cornered on his speed of light issue on BB. I can't remember if it was one of our local infidels who had him backed into a wall (he supported mutually contradictory statements, and couldn't weasel out), but perhaps Peterley should review that thread.

I suspect, in all honesty, that the Speed of Light thread that Barry was participating in was the reason for the recent evolution forum shutdown.

I think Barry needed time for those questions to go away.

Kevin

Unfortunately, it appears that when one does straighten things out and presents facts, the substance gets blown off with an out-of-context quote and dismissal.

Yes, I'm steamed. I spent too much time tracking down the whale refs to be blown off with a BS post. <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />